MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052631230 · doi:10.5539/ies.v6n7p157

Preservice Teachers’ Acceptance of Learning Management Software: An Application of the UTAUT2 Model

2013· article· en· W2052631230 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Arumugam Raman, Yahya Don

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpectancy theoryPsychologyLearning ManagementGrading (engineering)Unified theory of acceptance and use of technologyHabitMathematics educationVariance (accounting)Social influenceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moodle also known as Learning Management System is freely available to educators. Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) encourages students and instructors to utilize the teaching and learning process. Moodle enables lecturer to create sequences and facilitate activities for their students, auto-marked online quizzes and exams, navigation tools, files download, grading, student progress tracking, online calendar, etc. This paper investigated the relationships between the constructs that may influence preservice teachers’ acceptance of Learning Zone (Moodle) in their learning process and assessing the influence of variation on performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, and the habit to the behavioral intention or intention of usage. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) is verified and found that the regression model revealed 29.5% of the variance in student’s intentions with facilitating conditions and hedonic expectancy are considerable predictors of the behavioral intention. Based on this, recommendations for prospect research in the application of UTAUT2 are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations320
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207